Supreme Court Pulls Up Registry For Delay In Listing Pre-Arrest Bail Petition
The Supreme Court has directed its Registry to ensure that special leave petitions involving bail are not left pending for long periods without listing. The Court made such an observation while disposing of a petition seeking pre-arrest bail, noting that the matter had not been listed even once after interim protection was granted nearly two months earlier.
A Bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Prasanna B. Varale observed, “We are constrained to observe that the matter which was initially listed on 22.04.2024 has never been listed in the Court again prior to today. The Registry to ensure that the special leave petitions more particularly those dealing with prayers for bail are not kept pending for such a long period.”
Advocate of Record Dr. Surender Singh Hooda appeared for the Petitioners, while Advocate on Record Akshay Amritanshu appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts
The Petitioners had approached the Supreme Court seeking anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR registered in September 2023. The original offences were of lesser gravity, and the Petitioners were arrested and released on bail by the Magistrate. However, upon the addition of more serious offences under Sections 325 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, the Magistrate granted police permission to arrest them.
Subsequently, the Petitioners approached the Sessions Court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court for anticipatory bail. Their plea was rejected by the High Court in February 2024, prompting them to go before the Supreme Court by way of a special leave petition.
On April 22, 2024, the Supreme Court granted the Petitioners interim protection from arrest; however, the matter remained unlisted for nearly two months until it came up again on June 19, 2025.
Reasoning of the Court
The Court expressed displeasure at the Registry’s failure to list a matter involving liberty for nearly two months. It specifically flagged the need for prompt listing of bail matters. Referring to the delay in this case, the Bench remarked, “We are constrained to observe that the matter which was initially listed on 22.04.2024 has never been listed in the Court again prior to today.”
The Bench went on to direct, “The Registry to ensure that the special leave petitions more particularly those dealing with prayers for bail are not kept pending for such a long period.”
The Court also took note of the State’s submission that custodial interrogation of the Petitioners was no longer required.
In view of the circumstances and the State’s stand, the Court made absolute the interim protection granted to the Petitioners on April 22, 2024, and directed that it would continue until the conclusion of the trial.
Accordingly, the petition was disposed of.
Cause Title: Singh Ram & Anr. v. State of Haryana (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5281/2024)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocate on Record Dr. Surender Singh Hooda
Respondent: Advocate on Record Akshay Amritanshu; Advocates Drishti Rawal, Pragya Upadhyay, Drishti Saraf
